CONSTRUCTION OF EACH STATUTE

I PENAL STATUTES
Those, which impose punishment for an offense, committed against the State. Statutes, which
command or prohibit certain acts and establish penalties for their violation, are considered as
penal statutes.

HOW ARE PENAL STATUTES INTERPRETED?

Penal statutes are interpreted against the State and liberally in favor of the accused (People v
Purisima, G R Nos L 42050 66, 46229 32 46313 16 and L 46997, November 20 1978) This rule
should not, however, be unreasonably applied as to defeat the true intent and meaning of the
enactment found in the language actually used (People v Padilla and Von Arend 71 Phil 261)
The language of a penal statute cannot be enlarged beyond the ordinary meaning of its terms.
Only those persons, offenses and penalties, clearly included, beyond any reasonable doubt, will
be considered within the operation of the statute

II. REMEDIAL STATUTES

Those designed to correct an existing law, redress an existing grievance, or introduce regulations
conducive to the public good. (In Re: School Dist. No. 6, etc. 278, N. W, p. 792)
HOW ARE REMEDIAL STATUTES CONSTRUED?
Remedial statutes should be liberally construed because they were enacted by the legislature
precisely to improve the law and so that they will be in harmony with new ideas and conceptions
of justice and proper conduct of men (CrawfordStat Const p 494)

III. SUBSTANTIVE STATUTES

These are laws, which establish rights and duties. (Bstos u. Lucero, 81 Phil. 640)

RULES OF CONSTRUCTION OF SPECIFIC STATUTES

What the law grants, the court cannot deny. (Gonzales v. Gonzales, 58 Phil. 67) Therefore, the
first duty of the judge is to apply the law, whether it is just or unjust, provided that the law is
clear and there is no doubt. In case of doubt, the judge should presume that the law-making body
intended right and justice to prevail. (Article 10, New Civil Code) Substantive laws create rights
and duties. When these rights and duties are therefore stated in clear and categorical language,
there is no more room for construction or interpretation. There is only room for application. A
plain and unambiguous statute speaks for itself, and any attempt to make it clearer is vain labor
and tends only to obscurity. (Songco, et al. v. National Labor Relation Commission, G.R. Nos.
50999-51000, March 30, 1990) Even equity cannot be set up against clear provisions of law
based on public policy. Thus, a sale of a homestead within 5-year prohibitory period is void ab
initio and the same cannot be ratified nor can it acquire validity through the passage of time.
(Teodoro v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 46955, February 27, 1989) Equitable reasons will not
control against any well-settled rule of law or public policy. (Alvendia v. Intermediate Appellate
Court, G.R. No. L-72138; Bonamy v. Justice Paras, G.R. L-72373, January 22, 1990) In
Llamado v. Court of Appeals (G.R. L-84850, June 29, 1989), the Supreme Court ruled that a
judge must not rewrite a statute, neither to enlarge nor to contract it. Whatever temptations the
statesmanship of policy-making might wisely suggest, construction must eschew interpolation
and evisceration. He must not read in any way of creation. He must not read out except to avoid
patent nonsense of internal contradictions. (Underscoring Supplied)
 IV. LABOR STATUTES
Those laws that govern the rights and obligations of employers and employees, providing as well
for the rules by which such rights and obligations may be enforced.

HOW ARE LABOR LAWS INTERPRETED?

Article IV of the New Labor Code answers this question: It says: "All doubts in the
implementation and interpretation of the provisions of this code, including its implementing rules
and regulations, shall be resolved in favor of Labor." (Underscoring supplied)

V. TAX STATUTES
Those, which impose rules and regulations, related to taxation or to creation of particular sources
of revenue such as taxes, fees, and charges that are needed for the support of government and for
all public needs. In case of doubt, statutes levying taxes and duties are to be construed most
strongly against the government and in favor of the subjects or citizens, because burdens are not
to be imposed, nor presumed to be imposed beyond what statutes expressly and clearly import.
(Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Company, et al., G.R. No. L-
30644, 9 March 87, Second Division, Paras, J.)

HOW ARE TAX STATUTES INTERPRETED?

They are construed strictly against the taxing power and liberally in favor of the taxpayer (In Re:
Arbuckle's Estate, 18, A. 758). This is because tax laws seek to impose burdens upon persons
and property.

The following rules of construction apply to tax laws:

a. The real purpose of the legislature, if that purpose is discernible from its statute, will prevail
over the literal import of the words used. (3 Sutherland, Stat. Const. p. 42)

b. The spirit, rather than the letter of an ordinance, determines the construction thereof, and the
court looks less to its word and more to the context, subject matter, consequence and effect.
(Manila Race Horse Owner's Assn. v. De La Fuente, G.R. No. L-2947, January 11, 1951)

c. The history of the statute should be considered as an aid in the ascertainment of the intention
of the legislature. (Greenfield v. Meer, CA G.R. No. 156, September 27, 1846)

d. However, tax exemptions, are construed strictly against taxpayers and in favor of the taxing
power. Moreover, exemptions cannot be claimed unless they are expressly provided for in the
law. (Collector v. Manila Jockey Club, 98 Phil. 670)

VI. MANDATORY STATUTES

Those which contain words of command or of prohibition, and non-compliance with the same
render the proceedings to which it relates illegal and void.

VII. DIRECTORY STATUTES

Those which are permissible or discretionary in nature and merely outline the act to be done in
such a way that no injury can result from ignoring it or that its purpose can be accomplished in a
manner other than that prescribed and substantially the same result obtained. In determining
whether a statute is mandatory or directory, intention of the legislature must be ascertained. The
determination of this intention must not depend on the statute itself. However, the following
tests, while not conclusive or controlling, have often been used to determine the mandatory or
directory nature of statutes and statutory provisions:

1. TERMINOLOGY - The words or phrases regarded as making a provision mandatory include

"shall" and "must, "while the word "may" and the phrase "it is lawful" are usually regarded as
permissive or directory.
2. MATERIALITY OF THE PROVISIONS - Statutory provisions which relate to matters of
substance or which affect substantial rights, and are the very essence of the thing required to be
done, are regarded as mandatory. Provisions which are not material or which do not affect any
substantial right, and do not relate to the essence of the thing to be done, so that compliance is a
matter of convenience rather than substance, are considered to be directory.

3. CONSEQUENCES —A statutory provision is mandatory where a failure of performance will

result to the injury or prejudice to the substantial rights of interested persons. If such failure or
performance will not result to the injury or prejudice of the substantial rights of interested
persons, then the provisions is generally regarded merely as directory.

4. PENALTY - It is a general rule of construction that where a legislative provision is

accompanied by a penalty for a failure to observe it, the provision is mandatory. Otherwise, it is
directory.

As already stated, the said tests are not conclusive or controlling. Hence, while the word "shall"
is a word of command and generally considered as mandatory, it shall be considered as
permissive when it can be gathered from the context as well as from the language of the statute
that such is the apparent intention of the legislature. The word "may" may, at times, be construed
as "shall" if the statute provides for the doing of some act which is required by justice or public
duty, or where it vests a public body or office with power and authority to take such action which
concerns the public interest or rights of individuals. Article 3 of the Labor Code of the
Philippines is an example of a mandatory provision. It provides as follows:

"Article 3. Declaration of Basic Policy. - The State shall afford protection to labor, promote full
employment, ensure equal work opportunities regardless of sex, race or creed, and regulate the
relations between workers and employers. The State shall assure the rights of workers to self-
organization, collective bargaining, security of tenure, and just and humane conditions of work."

Section 28, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution is an example of a directory provision. It

provides as follows:
"x x x (2) The Congress may, by law, authorize the President to fix within specified limits, and
subject to such limitations and restrictions as it may impose, tariff rates, import and export
quotas, tonnage and wharfage dues, and other duties or imposts within the framework of the
national development program of the Government."

In Diokno v. Rehabilitation Finance Corporation, 91 Phil. 608, the Supreme Court ruled that the
phrase 'x x x shall subject to availability of funds x x" implied not a mandatory, but in
discretionary meaning.

RULES OF CONSTRUCTION OF SPECIFIC STATUTES

On this basis, the second sentence in Section 4, Article XIII of the 1987 Constitution, implies
that although the word "shall" is used, it is directory. It provides as follows: "Section 4. The state
shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform program founded on the right of farmers and
regular farmworkers, who are landless, to own directly or collectively the lands they till or, in
the case of other farmworkers, to receive a just share of the fruits thereof. To this end, the State
shall encourage and undertake the just distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to such
priorities and reasonable retention limits as the Congress may prescribe, taking into account
ecological, developmental, or equity considerations, and subject to the payment of just
compensation. In determining retention limits, the State shall respect the rights of small
landowners. The State shall further provide incentives of voluntary land sharing" (Underlining
Supplied)
On the other hand, the use of negative or prohibitory words in a statute is indicative of the
legislative intent to make the statute mandatory. The words "shall not," "cannot," or "ought not"
indicate positive prohibition.

Examples:
Section 13, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution
"Section 13. No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may hold any other office
or employment in the Government, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof,
including government owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries, during his term
without forfeiting his seat. Neither shall he be appointed to any office which may have been
created or the emoluments thereof increased during the term for which he was elected."

Section 6, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution

"Section 6. No person shall be a Member of the House of Representatives unless he is a natural-
born citizen of the Philippines and, on the day of the election, is at least twenty-five years of age,
able to read and write, and, except the party list representatives, a registered voter in the district
in which he shall be elected, and a resident thereof for a period of not less than one year
immediately preceding the day of the election."

Section 1, Article III of the 1987 Constitution

"Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law,
nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws."

VIII. PERMANENT STATUTE

It is a statute whose operation is not limited to a particular period of time but which continues in
force until it is duly altered or repealed.
Example: New Labor Code

IX. TEMPORARY STATUTE

It is a statute whose life or duration is fixed for a specified period of time at the moment of its
enactment, and continues in force, unless sooner repealed, until the expiration of the time fixed
for its duration.
Example: PD No. 851 granting 13th Month Pay.

X. GENERAL STATUTE
It is a statute which relates to persons, entities, or things as a class or operates equally or alike
upon all of a class, omitting no persons, entity, or thing belonging to a class. Example: The
Family Code.

XI. SPECIAL STATUTE

It is a statute, which relates to particular persons, entities or things of a class.
Example: Child and Youth Welfare Law

XII. LOCAL STATUTE

It is a statute whose operation is confined within territorial limits other than that of the whole
state, or applies to any political subdivision or subdivisions of the state less than the whole, or to
property and persons of a limited portion of the state, or is directed to a specific locality or spot,
as distinguished from a law which operates throughout the state.
Example: Law granting autonomy in Southern Philippines
 XIII. OTHER STATUTES
1. STATUTES IN DEROGATION OF RIGHTS - Price control laws are in derogation of
common or general rights. They are generally strictly construed and rigidly confined to cases
clearly within their scope of purpose.

2. STATUTES GRANTING PRIVILEGES - Those who invoke a special privilege granted by

a statute must comply strictly with its provisions. In the case therefore of a legislative franchise
granted to a firm to operate electric light and power, on condition that it should start operation
within a specified period, the failure of said firm to start operation within the specified period is a
ground for forfeiture of the franchise.

3. NATURALIZATION LAWS - These are strictly construed against the applicant because the
right of an alien to become a citizen by naturalization is merely a statutory right. The desire of an
applicant to become a naturalized citizen will still require the filing of his formal petition and he
has still to prove by satisfactory evidence that he has all the qualifications and none of the
disqualifications specified by law. In case of doubt, the doubt is resolved against the applicant
(Cu v. Republic, 115 Phil. 600).

4. STATUTES IMPOSING TAXES AND CUSTOM DUTIES - Generally they are construed
strictly against the taxing power and liberally in favor of the taxpayer. (In Re: Arbuckle's Estate,
188 A. 758) The reason for this is because tax laws impose burdens on the public. The scope of
tax laws cannot be enlarged as to include matters not specifically pointed out. In case of doubt,
they are construed most strongly against the government (Goulds v. Gould, 62 L. ed. p. 211).

5. STATUTE AUTHORIZING SUITS AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT - A statute

whereby the state gives its consent to be sued is strictly construed, and the waiver of immunity
from suit, being in derogation of sovereignty, will not be lightly inferred. (Equitable Ins. &
Casualty Co., 170 STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION Inc. v. Smith, Bell & Co. [Phil.], Inc., G.R.
No. L-24383, August 26, 1967) To justify a suit against the state or any of its agencies, the
statute conferring the right to maintain the action must be plain and positive, and its meaning
should not be left to doubt (Compania General de Tabacco de Filipinas v Government 45 Phil
663) Article XVI, Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution declares that the State may not be sued
without its consent. When this consent therefore is given, the State can be sued but this does not
necessarily mean that it concedes to liability. This only means that the one bringing the suit is
merely given the opportunity to prove that the State is liable. The consent of the State to be sued
may be given expressly or impliedly. The first may be given through a general or special law.
The second is given when the state itself commences litigation or when it enters into a contract.
Here, the state devolves into the level of an ordinary citizen.

6. STATUTES PRESCRIBING LIMITATIONS ON THE TAXING POWER OF LOCAL

GOVERNMENT UNITS - They are strictly construed against the national government and
liberally in favor of the local government units. Any doubt as to the existence of the taxing
power will be resolved in favor of the local government. The reason for this is that local
government units are now granted the power to create its own sources of revenue. Under the
1973 Constitution, the local government units have no inherent power of taxation.

7. STATUTE IMPOSING PENALTIES FOR NON-PAYMENT OF TAX - They are

liberally construed in favor of the government and strictly observed and interpreted against the
taxpayer. The reason is obvious, this facilitates the collection of taxes and penalties and tax
evasions will be avoided.

8. ELECTION LAWS - They should be construed liberally to give effect to the expressed will
of the electorate. Technicalities should not be allowed to prevail against the true will of the
people.
9. ADOPTION STATUTES - They are liberally construed in favor of the child to be adopted in
order to promote the noble objectives of the law. Adoption is not merely an act to establish a
relationship of paternity and filiation, but also as an act which endows a child with a legitimate
status. (Prasnick v. Republic, 98 Phil. 665) They also supply solace to those who have no
children or to those who have lost them, so that the void, which exists in a childless home, may
be filled (Yfkigo u. Republic, 93 Phil. 244).

10. AMNESTY PROCLAMATIONS - They should be construed liberally in favor of those

who are given amnesty. The reason for this is to encourage those who have not yet applied for
amnesty to return to the fold of the law and have normal lives once again.

11. VETERAN AND PENSION LAWS - They should be liberally construed and administered
in favor of the persons intended to be benefited by such law in order to achieve the humanitarian
purposes of the law.

12. GENERAL WELFARE LEGISLATIONS - They are construed liberally in favor of those
intended to be benefited. This construction is more in consonance with the constitutional
mandate to promote social justice.
Examples: Labor Code of the Philippines, Social Security Law, and Agrarian Reform Law

13. PROBATION LAW - It should be liberally construed to achieve its objective, which is to
give another chance to first offenders to go back to normal life.

14. LAWS ON ATTACHMENT - They are liberally construed in order to assist the parties in
obtaining speedy justice.

15. RULES OF COURT - Section 6, Rule 1 of the Revised Rules of Court provides as follows:
"Section 6. These rules shall be liberally construed in order to promote their objective and to
assist the parties in obtaining just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action and
proceeding."

16. STATUTES PRESCRIBING QUALIFICATIONS FOR AN OFFICE - Statutes

prescribing the qualifications of persons to a public office is, as a rule, regarded as mandatory.
This means that a person, who is not eligible or qualified at the time that he assumed office, may
be ousted from office at any time upon discovery that he is not indeed qualified and eligible.

17. ELECTION LAWS ON QUALIFICATION AND DISQUALIFICATION - These are

considered mandatory even after the elections. Hence, a candidate who filed his certificate of
candidacy beyond the period required by law is disqualified to run for office, as his certificate is
void. This is true even if the disqualified candidate wins the election. He still remains unqualified
for his election and does not validate his certificate of candidacy (Sanchez v. Del Rosario, 1
SCRA 1102).

XIV. OTHER CLASSIFICATIONS

I. A statute could either be prospective or retroactive
PROSPECTIVE STATUTE - It is one which operates upon or regulates acts or
transactions taking place after it takes effect. As a rule, laws operate prospectively,
not retroactively, except in the following cases:
(a) If the law itself provides that it will be retroactive (Article 4, New Civil Code);
(b) If the law is remedial in nature;
(c) If the law is penal in nature provided it is favorable to the accused or the convict,
and that the accused or convict is not a habitual delinquent (Article 22, Revised Penal
Code);
(d) If the law is curative; and
 (e) If the law is of an emergency nature and authorized by the police power of the
government.
Article 4 of the New Civil Code provides as follows: "Article 4. Laws shall have no retroactive
effect, unless the contrary is provided." In general, laws are prospective, not retroactive, and no
court will hold a statute to be retroactive when the legislature has not said so. In other words,
statutes are to be construed as having only prospective operation, unless the legislature intends
that they will have retroactive effect. This could either be made expressly in the law itself or it
could be implied from the language used. In case of doubt, the doubt will be resolved against the
retroactive operation of laws (Montilla v. Agustinia Corp., 24 Phil. 229).

RETROACTIVE STATUTE - It is one which creates a new obligation, one which

takes away or impairs vested rights acquired under existing laws, or creates a new
obligation and imposes a new duty, or attaches a new disability in respect of
transactions or considerations already passed (Castro v. Sagales, 94 Phil. 208, 210).
As mentioned earlier, there are times when laws are precisely made retroactive. When
the law itself provides that they shall apply retroactively, or when the intention to
make the law retroactive is implied from the words used, the problem that may arise
is whether the said law is violative or not of the constitutional provisions on
impairment of obligation and contract, ex post facto law, and bill of attainder, thus:

"Section 10. No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed." (Article
III, 1987 Constitution)
"Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted." (Article III,
1987 Constitution)

A good example of a provision, which expressly provides for the retroactive effect of the law, is
Article 256 of the Family Code to wit:
"Article 256. This Code shall have retroactive effect insofar as it does not prejudice or impair
vested or acquired rights in accordance with the Civil Code or other laws."
The retroactive effect of the Family Code, however, is qualified by the proviso, thus: "x x x
insofar as it does not prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights in accordance with the Civil
Code or other laws" should be respected.

II. A statute could either be a repealing act or an amendatory act.

REPEALING ACT - It is one which revokes or terminates another statute, either by

express language or by implication. (Crawford, Statutory Constitution, p. 110)
Laws are repealed only by subsequent ones (Article 7, New Civil Code) and laws are repealed
either expressly or impliedly. However, implied repeals are not looked upon with favor. (U.S. v.
Palacio, 33 Phil. 208) Hence, if both statutes can stand together, there is no repeal. (Lechoco v.
Apostol, 44 Phil. 138) The Civil Code repeals the Old Civil Code of 1889. The Family Code has
expressly repealed Title III on marriage; Title IV on legal separation; Title V on rights and
obligations between husband and wife; title VI on property relations between husband and wife;
Title VII on the family; Title VIII on paternity and filiation; Title IX on support; Title XI on
parental authority, and Title XV on emancipation and age of majority. Article 254 of the Family
Code provides as follows: "Article 254. Titles III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X and XV of Book 1
Republic Act No. 386, otherwise known as the Civil Code of the Philippines, as amended, and
Articles 17, 18, 19, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 39, 40, 41 and 42 of Presidential Decree No. 603,
otherwise known as the Child and Youth Welfare Code, as amended, and all laws, decrees,
executive orders, proclamations, rules and regulations, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are
hereby repealed." This article specifies the provisions of the Civil Code and the Child and Youth
Welfare Code that were expressly repealed by the Family Code. The closing sentence in Article
254 which states "x x x all laws, decrees, executive orders, proclamations, rules and regulations,
or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed," indicates that the repeal referred to is
merely an implied repeal. THE REPEAL OF A STATUTE IS EITHER TOTAL OR PARTIAL
A statute, which is totally repealed, is rendered revoked completely. When the repeal, however,
is partial, the portion or portions not affected by the repeal continue to exist. Repeal is a question
of intent. Express repeal of a statute or any of its provisions is accomplished by a direct and
express provision or declaration in a subsequent statute so there will be no doubt as to
CHAPTER VI what statute is intended. In this case, the courts should respect the specific intent
of the legislature to repeal what it has so specified. Article 254 of the Family Code specifically
enumerates the provisions of the Civil Code and the Child and Youth Welfare Code that were
repealed by the Family Code Repeals by implication can be done in two ways (1) By covering
the whole subject matter so that it is intended as a substitute for the earlier statute, and (2) By
containing provisions which are inconsistent and irreconcilable with the earlier statute. The
courts are slow to hold that a statute has repealed another by implication. If the courts cannot
avoid doing so through the use of a fair and reasonable construction, they will not make
adjudication that a statute has repealed another by implication. This is in accordance with the
established principle that repeals and amendments by implications are not favored (Quisimbing v
Lachica G B No L-14683, May 30, 1961, 2 SCRA 182). The second sentence in Article 254 of
the Family Code which says "x x x and all laws, decrees, executive orders, proclamations, rules
and regulations, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed," gives rise to this
question. Will that be considered a repeal? If so, what is it? It is not an express repeal, unlike the
first sentence of Article 254 which states specifically the provisions, and the titles, which are
repealed. It is merely an implied repeal because it fails to identify or designate the act or acts that
are intended to be repealed.

AMENDATORY ACT - It makes an addition to the original laws or it operates to

change it.
An amendment of a statute is effected through the enactment of an amendatory act modifying or
altering some provisions of the statute. The amendment could either be express or implied. There
is an express amendment when the amendatory act specified the provisions of a statute that are
amended. There is an implied amendment where a part of a prior statute embracing the same
subject has become inconsistent with the new provisions as amended. How should the
amendment be construed?
1. A statute and its amendment should be construed in its entirety. The amendment becomes part
of the original statute as if it had always been contained therein;
2. Provisions of the original act which are not affected by the amendment shall remain in force;
3. The amendment made indicates that the legislature intended a change in the law or in its
meaning. The court therefore gives effect to such intent;
4. As a rule, the amendatory act operates prospectively unless otherwise provided or if it could
be implied from the language used that the legislature intends to give it a retroactive effect. Even
in the latter case, however, the amendment cannot be construed retroactively if doing so will
impair vested rights or the obligation of contracts (People v. Buttler, 120 SCRA 281).

III. A Statute could either be a reference statute, a supplemental statute, a reenacted

statute or an adopted statute.

REFERENCE STATUTE - It is a statute, which refers to other statutes and makes

them applicable to the subject of legislation.

A reference statute should be construed as to harmonize with, and, give effect to, the adopted
statute. This statute is often used to avoid unnecessary repetitions. By simply making reference
to a particular provision in an existing law and without the need of introducing another law, the
rule, provision or term/s intended to be applied is stated in the reference statute. Hence, the
provision which states that the terms legal or regular Holiday and Special Holiday, as used in
Article 94 of the Labor Code shall now be referred to as a regular Holiday and Special day,
respectively, indicates that this is a reference statute.
SUPPLEMENTAL STATUTES - They are intended to supply deficiencies in
existing statutes and to add to, complete, or extend the statute without changing or
modifying its original text. The original statute and the supplemental act should be
construed together in its entirety.

REENACTED STATUTES - They reenact provisions of an earlier statute. The

provisions in the earlier statute are reproduced in the same words or substantially the
same words. The courts will therefore follow the construction, which the adopted
statute previously received.

ADOPTED STATUTES - They are statutes patterned after, or copied from a statute
of a foreign country. The construction given to them by the courts of the country
from which they were taken will be considered by the courts. Such construction,
however, will not be conclusive to our courts. Our laws on voluntary and involuntary
insolvency is in great part a copy of the Insolvency Act of California, enacted in
1895, which, in turn, was based upon the United States Bankruptcy Act of 1867
though it contains a few provisions from the American Bankruptcy Law of 1638
(Sun Life Assurance Co. u. Ingersoll, 42 Phil. 81).